ArticleSaudi medical journal2025
Effectiveness of EPID-based in-vivo dosimetry with EPIgray
Article in Saudi medical journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo evaluate the effectiveness of in-vivo dosimetry (IVD) utilizing an electronic portal imaging device (EPID) in conjunction with EPIgray
methodsUsing cross-sectional analysis, data were collected from the linear accelerator of twenty patients undergoing (H&N) radiotherapy treatments using the Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT) modality from June 2019 to October 2023 at Gleneagles Hospital Penang, Penang, Malaysia. EPIgray
resultsThe percentage difference between the reconstructed doses and planned doses (ΔD%) for patients ranged from (1.96) to (-11.1), and the results showed that 60% of the patients' doses were within the tolerance range (±5%). The phantom study resulted in a percentage dose difference (ΔD%) of -1.73%, and this was established as a benchmark for accuracy.
conclusionThe study proves that using EPID-based in-vivo dosimetry with EPIgray
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.